Tiffany Bruce – 9/30/10

This page was last updated on September 30, 2010.

Gays should be allowed to serve; Tiffany Bruce; Beaver County Times; September 30, 2010.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“In response to Sunday’s letter to the editor ‘Gays should not be in the military,’ it should not matter your preference on straight or gay.

“A person who is gay can serve our country with dignity and respect, just as well as someone who is straight. The military is just like any other job. You have relationships that happen, and they may not always be of straight nature.

“I find it very disrespectful to say that because someone is gay they should not serve our country.”

[RWC] Before I proceed with my position, which I’ve provided in previous critiques, let me state I have neither military nor behavioral science experience or expertise. What I write below just seems to make sense. At the risk of being labeled ignorant and a sexist homophobe, here goes.

One of the reasons I oppose women serving in combat roles alongside men has to do with the sexual tension present in mixed groups and the potential effects on the mission even if full-blown romance doesn’t break out. There are a couple of other reasons, but this is the one relevant to this discussion. The fact non-pregnant sailors leave on an aircraft carrier but a number return pregnant makes it obvious sex isn’t checked at the dock.

When you have homosexuals serving with members of the same sex, how is that different from heterosexuals serving with members of the opposite sex?

Is this one of those cases where commonsense - at least to me - is wrong? I don’t know. As I wrote above, I have neither experience nor expertise in this area. Until we’re certain, however, I don’t believe our armed forces should serve as a behavioral science lab for politically correct social policies.

A local parody website tried to equate opposing homosexuals serving in the military and opposing blacks serving in the military. I found that attempt to be flawed.